A few weeks ago I bought the new book by Hugleikur Dagsson, a comic artist from Iceland who makes comics with extremely dark humor. Almost always the jokes test the limits of good taste. You check out what I am talking about at dagsson.com. The jokes on the front page are of the not-so-offending-kind, but you will get the idea. The book I bought is called in Icelandic "Okkur 4". In Finnish the book is called, freely translate to English, "Laugh Pervert, Laugh".
Now to the content of the book. I thought that nothing would shake me and I would think most of the jokes would be hilarious. But I was wrong. Of course one thing that the author wants to do is to test the limits of your humour, I do understand that much. Still some of the jokes were just too brutal and there was no joke or twist in them. And there are quite a few of those in the book.
Second thing is that it seem that this kind of humour works only in small servings at a time. Reading the whole book at once is just too much. My favourite joke in the book is the one were wife farts and the husband says "our marriage is over". =)
After reading this book I felt immensely disgusted and amused at the same time. Which I think is what the author is aiming for. If you want to laugh and wonder who writes this kind of immoral shit I recommend that you read Okkur 4.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Do you have Bols?
I was in Amsterdam in June on a work trip and I bought a bottle of Corenwyn from Schiphol on my way back. I finally managed to crack open the bottle tonight and here are my thoughts about the this Dutch spirit.
This is what Wikipedia has to say about jenevers in general:
This is what Wikipedia has to say about jenevers in general:
Okay, now that we have our facts it is time to go to how this fire brew tastes like. At first the smell of juniper is quite pleasant. *EDIT* There is also hint of yeast in smell. However after the first sip you realize that the taste of Corenwyn is quite strong and you can really taste the juniper. The after taste leaves a nutty taste in your mouth. For a spirit the taste is very agreeable and nice. I really like this stuff. This time I drank Corenwyn raw, but some time I must try mixing it with tonic water. Plus the bottle made from clay looks really cool.
Jenever (also known as junever, genievre, genever, jeniever, peket or in the English-speaking world as Holland gin or Dutch gin), is the juniper-flavored and strongly alcoholic traditional liquor of the Netherlands, from which gin evolved. Believed to have been invented by a Dutch chemist and alchemist named Sylvius de Bouve,it was first sold as a medicine in the late 16th century. In the 17th century it became more popular for its flavor. Traditional jenever is still very popular in the Netherlands and Belgium. European Union regulations specify that only liquor made in these two countries, two French provinces and two German federal states can use the name jenever. Source: Wikipedia: Jenever.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Devilishly good album
Okay, okay, "Get behind me Satan" isn't the newest album, hell it isn't even the newest album by White Stripes, but it is the one that I am listening at the moment.
Previously I had almost ignored The White Stripes and did think that they weren't even that good.Somehow this summer I really started digging "Blue Orchid" and it's great guitar sounds. I was quite surprised how much there is variation on this album. There great rock sounds. The drumming is awesome. The strange country wibe in some of the songs is incredible. You won't get bored listeninh to this album.
I definitely want to recommend that you go listen to in Spotify.
Previously I had almost ignored The White Stripes and did think that they weren't even that good.Somehow this summer I really started digging "Blue Orchid" and it's great guitar sounds. I was quite surprised how much there is variation on this album. There great rock sounds. The drumming is awesome. The strange country wibe in some of the songs is incredible. You won't get bored listeninh to this album.
I definitely want to recommend that you go listen to in Spotify.
 | |
| The White Stripes - Get Behind Me Satan |
Saturday, July 24, 2010
New type of living
Maybe a month ago I saw a document about Michael Reynolds.Garbage Warrior made in UK in 2007 is document about Micheal and his life.
I think I have heard about Mr.Reynolds and his "Earthships" at least once before. These earthships are experimental houses that Mr. Reynolds has been building already for many decades. His goal is to make houses that are made out things that people throw away (e.g. car tyres, bottles etc.). The houses are designed so that they would leave the smallest possible impact on nature and that the houses would be as far as possible self-sufficient when it comes to heating, electricity and water.
The documentary showed that sometimes the rules that we have made to protect ourselves inhibit truly innovative people to try new things. This really bothered me since here is no question about it that we need to develop housing that uses less electricity and natural resources.
In my home country industrial production of low-energy and so-called passive houses is about to start in larger scale and that is quite positive sign. Even though these houses consume significantly less or even no energy the downside is that they rely heavily on technology provided by the society. There is nothing wrong with organised society, but sometimes things go wrong you cannot rely on society to provide utilities. That's why I think Reynolds gets it right. Let's make our housing self-sufficient and ecological.
I think what Michael and his team are trying to do is achievable. At the moment he is building his houses in New Mexico (and I guess also in Georgia) what know about the climate in New Mexico is that it is not the most hospitable. So it should possible to develop these houses so that they work also in places were conditions are less harsh. I just wonder if these houses work in places like Finland where temperature difference during the year can be 70 degrees celsius?
Anyways I was really impressed and inspired by the documentary and if I ever get possibility to visit one of these Earthships I will definately do it. Check earthship.com for more details. The houses look really cool.
I think I have heard about Mr.Reynolds and his "Earthships" at least once before. These earthships are experimental houses that Mr. Reynolds has been building already for many decades. His goal is to make houses that are made out things that people throw away (e.g. car tyres, bottles etc.). The houses are designed so that they would leave the smallest possible impact on nature and that the houses would be as far as possible self-sufficient when it comes to heating, electricity and water.
The documentary showed that sometimes the rules that we have made to protect ourselves inhibit truly innovative people to try new things. This really bothered me since here is no question about it that we need to develop housing that uses less electricity and natural resources.
In my home country industrial production of low-energy and so-called passive houses is about to start in larger scale and that is quite positive sign. Even though these houses consume significantly less or even no energy the downside is that they rely heavily on technology provided by the society. There is nothing wrong with organised society, but sometimes things go wrong you cannot rely on society to provide utilities. That's why I think Reynolds gets it right. Let's make our housing self-sufficient and ecological.
I think what Michael and his team are trying to do is achievable. At the moment he is building his houses in New Mexico (and I guess also in Georgia) what know about the climate in New Mexico is that it is not the most hospitable. So it should possible to develop these houses so that they work also in places were conditions are less harsh. I just wonder if these houses work in places like Finland where temperature difference during the year can be 70 degrees celsius?
Anyways I was really impressed and inspired by the documentary and if I ever get possibility to visit one of these Earthships I will definately do it. Check earthship.com for more details. The houses look really cool.
Friday, July 2, 2010
My thoughts on social media
This week I participated to a training course that gave an overview on how to use social media in marketing. The course was reasonably interesting and I must say that I now know a bit more about how to utilize tools like Facebook and LinkedIn in marketing.
One lecture on the course handled the future. The lecturer presented a vision where social media and networks will penetrate to every field of our life. Let?s say that you are walking in the city center and would like to find a restaurant. You take your mobile phone from your pocket and it can recommend to you restaurants based on the places you have visited before, what your friends have recommended and so. The phone could give you the menu an how to get to the restaurant, maybe even make a table reservation and if your friends happen to be in near the phone may suggest that you ask them to join for dinner. This sort of services would apply everywhere and to everything. Computing would be ubiquitous.
For me this kind of vision sounds a bit pointless is the problem that is being solved with computing being everywhere all the time really that big. What is wrong with not knowing where you are, why don?t you want to explore new cities. What this ubiquitous computing becomes a straight jacket that instead of making us explore and try new things keeps us always in our comfort zone. I think that the best part of living is not knowing what becomes happens next, trying new things and challenging yourself every day. If people become so accustomed to being surrounded by technology that advises them in every situation, we might soon be living in world that Isaac Asimov drew up in his book ?Caves Of Steel?.
One crucial point of network is that it brings benefit to the participants. How does the situation change if network becomes too large and it is difficult to assess if someone is getting things without contributing anything. I also wonder that is it possible that the actual first signs no longer are seen in social media, but instead the first signs of trends will be seen in the IRL social networks of early adopters of new trends. What I mean that if when some new trend appears in social media it is already everywhere and known by everybody it becomes quite impossible to try and benefit from this emerging trend.
What happens when people do not want to share or wish to limit the network among which they wish to share information? Will we see new barriers and borders being raised so that people will able to protect their networks? Last week I read that the World Economic Forum has started an social media service for its participants. The service is called WELCOM and the participants of the service are 5000 of the most influential people in the world. Of course these people can not (but should they?) talk openly about what they think about where the world is going, so it is quite understandable that a service like WELCOM has been created.
Social media undoubtedly brings with it also good things. It will be easier to tell about new ideas and opportunities to the right people straight away. The rippling effect of your message may reach a lot more people than a normal marketing message and it will also be more accurate. There is also a great possibility to react to customer responses more efficiently and to develop your goods and services according what customers think.
I predict that the next phase in the evolution of social media will have something to do with assessing if this matters to you personally. The professionals, I believe, speak of semantic web.
One lecture on the course handled the future. The lecturer presented a vision where social media and networks will penetrate to every field of our life. Let?s say that you are walking in the city center and would like to find a restaurant. You take your mobile phone from your pocket and it can recommend to you restaurants based on the places you have visited before, what your friends have recommended and so. The phone could give you the menu an how to get to the restaurant, maybe even make a table reservation and if your friends happen to be in near the phone may suggest that you ask them to join for dinner. This sort of services would apply everywhere and to everything. Computing would be ubiquitous.
For me this kind of vision sounds a bit pointless is the problem that is being solved with computing being everywhere all the time really that big. What is wrong with not knowing where you are, why don?t you want to explore new cities. What this ubiquitous computing becomes a straight jacket that instead of making us explore and try new things keeps us always in our comfort zone. I think that the best part of living is not knowing what becomes happens next, trying new things and challenging yourself every day. If people become so accustomed to being surrounded by technology that advises them in every situation, we might soon be living in world that Isaac Asimov drew up in his book ?Caves Of Steel?.
One crucial point of network is that it brings benefit to the participants. How does the situation change if network becomes too large and it is difficult to assess if someone is getting things without contributing anything. I also wonder that is it possible that the actual first signs no longer are seen in social media, but instead the first signs of trends will be seen in the IRL social networks of early adopters of new trends. What I mean that if when some new trend appears in social media it is already everywhere and known by everybody it becomes quite impossible to try and benefit from this emerging trend.
What happens when people do not want to share or wish to limit the network among which they wish to share information? Will we see new barriers and borders being raised so that people will able to protect their networks? Last week I read that the World Economic Forum has started an social media service for its participants. The service is called WELCOM and the participants of the service are 5000 of the most influential people in the world. Of course these people can not (but should they?) talk openly about what they think about where the world is going, so it is quite understandable that a service like WELCOM has been created.
Social media undoubtedly brings with it also good things. It will be easier to tell about new ideas and opportunities to the right people straight away. The rippling effect of your message may reach a lot more people than a normal marketing message and it will also be more accurate. There is also a great possibility to react to customer responses more efficiently and to develop your goods and services according what customers think.
I predict that the next phase in the evolution of social media will have something to do with assessing if this matters to you personally. The professionals, I believe, speak of semantic web.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Making Innovations
As I wrote in my previous blog posting I am participating to the 1st EU-Russia Innovation Forum in Lappeenranta, Finland. I want to stress that I am total dilettante in the field if someone does not notice that from the things I have written to this blog.
Somehow these seminars are a bit idiotic, because there is a room full of people just yapping (or few are yapping) about things that have no potential in creating these innovations ie. the supposed goal of the seminar. Also it may be harmful to have these seminars because there is a danger that thinking about these things unifies and thus making the appearance of new innovations difficult. I believe it is crucial that there is diversification in thinking patterns and practices, that enables the creation new ideas and practices. Somehow I agree with the CEO of Technopolis Mr. Keith Silverang that governments are the problem not the solution in these innovation matters, but on the other hand governments have the ability to build circumstances that are needed for innovative society, I mean education and equal opportunities for all to develop their own abilities to full potential. In this respect there are grounds for organizing these sort of events: it is good that the government, business people and universities think together how to create the best circumstances for new innovations to appear and how process them so that they became viable options to better our society.
This brings us to the second thing is it possible to make innovations grow. I think that the answer is yes and no. Yes, it is possible to promote the appearance of so called small innovations i.e. the development of telecommunications and types of new services. Is it possible to promote the appearance of big, world changing innovations? For that you, naturally, need time, money (a lot) and talented people. They will not appear, because of some 5-year government program. For that you need enough resources in the basic structure that support innovation starting from social security, basic education and universities that supports all and has the possibility to give enough challenge to these special individuals to realize their interest. Of course there is also this point that maybe there should not be any support that these extra ordinary people will find their way, what ever the circumstances are.
Every child should have the feeling that the world is open to them. Some doors will of course close, but the ability to succeed should be open to all. To create this feeling every child should receive the best education possible. The content of the education should be as wide as possible. It should support their ability to understand the big picture and their basic education should include ability understand many different subject areas and the ability to think, to categorize, to argue, to induct, to exchange views, to weigh different possibilities and make a decision based on the facts. Also they should high values and moral. I think this is one of the most important things. In addition the concept of success should not be too narrow, because then we may lose innovations that are not in the fields of business and economy.
I think the focus should be on the big world changing innovations rather than innovations create quick profits and business.
This writing is all quite general and a bit high flying but this is how I feel. This is what long day at a seminar and one Guinness does to you.
Ps. If you are looking for Irish pub in Lappeenranta go to Old Cock. (hahaa) Happy hour 12.00-18.00 Guinness/Kilkenny/ Kozel/Fosters etc. 3.20€
Somehow these seminars are a bit idiotic, because there is a room full of people just yapping (or few are yapping) about things that have no potential in creating these innovations ie. the supposed goal of the seminar. Also it may be harmful to have these seminars because there is a danger that thinking about these things unifies and thus making the appearance of new innovations difficult. I believe it is crucial that there is diversification in thinking patterns and practices, that enables the creation new ideas and practices. Somehow I agree with the CEO of Technopolis Mr. Keith Silverang that governments are the problem not the solution in these innovation matters, but on the other hand governments have the ability to build circumstances that are needed for innovative society, I mean education and equal opportunities for all to develop their own abilities to full potential. In this respect there are grounds for organizing these sort of events: it is good that the government, business people and universities think together how to create the best circumstances for new innovations to appear and how process them so that they became viable options to better our society.
This brings us to the second thing is it possible to make innovations grow. I think that the answer is yes and no. Yes, it is possible to promote the appearance of so called small innovations i.e. the development of telecommunications and types of new services. Is it possible to promote the appearance of big, world changing innovations? For that you, naturally, need time, money (a lot) and talented people. They will not appear, because of some 5-year government program. For that you need enough resources in the basic structure that support innovation starting from social security, basic education and universities that supports all and has the possibility to give enough challenge to these special individuals to realize their interest. Of course there is also this point that maybe there should not be any support that these extra ordinary people will find their way, what ever the circumstances are.
Every child should have the feeling that the world is open to them. Some doors will of course close, but the ability to succeed should be open to all. To create this feeling every child should receive the best education possible. The content of the education should be as wide as possible. It should support their ability to understand the big picture and their basic education should include ability understand many different subject areas and the ability to think, to categorize, to argue, to induct, to exchange views, to weigh different possibilities and make a decision based on the facts. Also they should high values and moral. I think this is one of the most important things. In addition the concept of success should not be too narrow, because then we may lose innovations that are not in the fields of business and economy.
I think the focus should be on the big world changing innovations rather than innovations create quick profits and business.
This writing is all quite general and a bit high flying but this is how I feel. This is what long day at a seminar and one Guinness does to you.
Ps. If you are looking for Irish pub in Lappeenranta go to Old Cock. (hahaa) Happy hour 12.00-18.00 Guinness/Kilkenny/ Kozel/Fosters etc. 3.20€
Seminar Blues
I am participating to a seminar in Lappeeranta, 1st Eu-Russia Innovation Forum. The purpose of the forum's purpose is to discuss the innovation cooperation of the two parties from different perspectives.
Previously I haven't participated to such an seminar and it has been quite an enlightening experience and here some remarks I've made during the seminar:
1. The same things seem to be repeated in many speeches.
It just shows how important it is to support the status quo or create rapport or show that you know the basic things of the subject area. Also disagreeing is something that does not exists in these events or maybe in the corridor discussion and discussions during the evening dinner.
2. You should know why you are there
Why go if you do not have a clear target. It is a bit embarrassing to talk to people when you do not have a clear target to present to them.
3. Going as an outsider
Social aspect
It is quite painful to just walk around and look as other people group and meet the old acquaintances and chat around. People seem to know exactly are you in or out. I've seen couple of other young people that walk around and obviously they do not have a clue why they are there.
Outside of the subject area
The topic of the seminar is something that is totally unknown to me. I have no previous knowledge of how innovation is supported and promoted by universities, businesses and governments. First of all the jargon related, especially the different program and policy names, is quite a jungle to navigate. Also not knowing anything makes the lectures and speeches quite irrelevant.
As a closing comment I'd like to say that this seminar has left me with two kinds of feelings. Firstly it has been a great opportunity to meet new people and familiarize with subject area that has previously been unknown to me. Secondly I think that for me this seminar was a bit unnecessary and I had nothing to give or ability to take use of the opportunities at the seminar.
Previously I haven't participated to such an seminar and it has been quite an enlightening experience and here some remarks I've made during the seminar:
1. The same things seem to be repeated in many speeches.
It just shows how important it is to support the status quo or create rapport or show that you know the basic things of the subject area. Also disagreeing is something that does not exists in these events or maybe in the corridor discussion and discussions during the evening dinner.
2. You should know why you are there
Why go if you do not have a clear target. It is a bit embarrassing to talk to people when you do not have a clear target to present to them.
3. Going as an outsider
Social aspect
It is quite painful to just walk around and look as other people group and meet the old acquaintances and chat around. People seem to know exactly are you in or out. I've seen couple of other young people that walk around and obviously they do not have a clue why they are there.
Outside of the subject area
The topic of the seminar is something that is totally unknown to me. I have no previous knowledge of how innovation is supported and promoted by universities, businesses and governments. First of all the jargon related, especially the different program and policy names, is quite a jungle to navigate. Also not knowing anything makes the lectures and speeches quite irrelevant.
As a closing comment I'd like to say that this seminar has left me with two kinds of feelings. Firstly it has been a great opportunity to meet new people and familiarize with subject area that has previously been unknown to me. Secondly I think that for me this seminar was a bit unnecessary and I had nothing to give or ability to take use of the opportunities at the seminar.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)